http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2014/04/ap...ralian-review/
Hahaha
Printable View
haha?
i dont really like mac's but this is a neat little piece of hardware.
also this isnt that "new" anymore and i think that the "new" mac pro has been posted here already a while ago.
This is very old news, there was a rather largish thread on this when reviews originally started coming out.
Gizmodo needs to be ashamed of this so called "review", a few synthetic benchmarks and that's a review? Meh over all.
That's indeed a bad review. Not worth creating a thread at all.
It's still the sexiest PC case currently made by any PC manufacturer in the world today. Imagine if HP or DELL could make it instead......Quote:
Originally Posted by NKrader
It looks like a garbage bin, don't get how that is sexy.
^^^ ThisQuote:
Originally Posted by Kallenator
I wonder if people have to put a sign on the side that says "NOT A TRASH CAN" so their coworkers will stop putting wrappers and empty cups in their Mac.
looks like a trash can anyway
yes becuase I have to put a note on my caselabs case to warn people that its not a dishwasher.. becuase its white and a cube..Quote:
Originally Posted by Budwise
lame generalizations are lame.
Who puts trashcans up on a desk, which is where these mostly end up considering their size?
I agree, terrible review. However, does anyone have any more recent reviews with hopefully some new(ly) optimized software for the dual gpu's? I know there was a general lack of variety for those back at launch. Also, I with they would stop comparing the d700's to W9000's, the pair is far closer to an S10000 with a bit more ram (or the same as the newer, 2x6GB s10000 thats supposedly out), and the price, clocks, and power draw are whole lot closer to what I'd exect the pair of D700's to be worth/perform as well.
Looks like R2D2 took a dump :ROTF:
Lol @ the trashbin comparison :).
I just gotta say, wow, they sent those peeps hardware todo a review like that?
It's cool, I got hardwarez, now I'll run like some benches and write the scores out in 3 lines of text and be done with it.
I've never seen a review like that, it's more like a preview :).
Is there another one out there where they just put windows on it right away lol?
I think many people in the professional media production sector will be using hubs and chassis with this, and I'd guess it'll end up on the floor because of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeroon
In addition I really think it's a crappy design for many because if you're in pro-audio the video provided is utter over-kill. Add to that the lack of pci-e slots and you'll have to spend more on that chassis. And add to that the tendency to have machine rooms for... well... machines... This guy doesn't rackmount nicely... or at all...
If you want a rackmount, build a rackmount. Don't complain a desktop doesn't make a good rackmount. Its not like this is the only choice out there for every single application possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by MattiasNYC
I'm not an editor or a mac user at all, but in searching to see what hardware is beneficial for audio editing was mostly ram size and cpu. However, it seems they can have parts offloaded to the gpu, with mentions/articles about Logic X having/getting it. So just b/c it wasn't able to use it before the new mac pro doesn't mean they won't see a benefit to having gpu hardware available now.
It's not even a preview, it's a joke haha.Quote:
Originally Posted by NEOAethyr
I put windows 8 enterprise on and ran 3dmark for the lols
Not made for gaming, and I use it primarily for FCPX, but it does play if you want it.
The drivers on the windows side are all over the place for performance and crossfire.
In unigine the second GPU is ignored most of the time.
I only saw a 10FPS increase in tests with Crossfire with Direct X, over a single D700 in OSX's OpenGL.
http://i.minus.com/ibbhSszRgFGIHK.png
those are actually pretty good score.Quote:
Originally Posted by N19h7m4r3
whats funny is your better in firestrike by alot compared to my computer, but im better by alot in the other two. LOLZ
Yeah, the drivers in Windows are a bit all over the place.Quote:
Originally Posted by NKrader
I ran some Unigine, and the second GPU is barely used or noticed sometimes.
The Windows OpenGL unigine tests are also rubbish compared to OpenGL in OSX.
While my older Mac Pro with GTX 660 is slightly faster by 0.7FPS in Unigine Valley than a Single D700 in OSX.
AMD needs to sort their drivers out for OpenGL.
http://i.minus.com/iFSYL9Wo3pq1P.png
OpenCL is a different story though.
http://i.minus.com/iUZUdm6RepcbT.png
Neat, how is Cinebench?
Here you go.Quote:
Originally Posted by sauria
AMD's OS X drivers definitely need some work.
http://i.minus.com/i9y0OppkywuHN.png
Thanks, are there any OpenCL benchmarks that uses both D700s?
The older Macs fit better in rack environments from what I've seen. The newer ones won't fit as well. You're right, this isn't the only choice, and that's my point. Some people are complaining about the form factor despite it being cute.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeroon
Logic X is just one out of several DAWs out there (Digital Audio Workstation), and it is certainly not the most used professionally in the US' medium to big studios/stages. Sure, it may get that capability later, but none of the other big DAWs have that capability, and none of the companies that make them have plans to enable processing on the GPUs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeroon
For audio, for the vast majority of users with a reasonably modern computer, those GPUs are just a waste of money, period. And a buyer of the that Mac still has to pay for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sauria
Luxmark will take both.
It has an issue where it only reports the second GPU in its idle state, hence the 150Mhz instead of 850Mhz. it clocks up to 100% once it gets used.
http://i.minus.com/iPai8jJzazWQJ.png
I'm going to assume (i know, bad idea) that by several DAW's, that at least a few of those do not require an Apple machine. And that opens up a huge range of both consumer and workstation grade machines other than the mac pro that can do the job just as well for cheaper, to better for the same price. If they have still chosen the Mac Pro, it can either be attributed to its tiny size, or the fact that they wanted an Apple. I don't see the problem with that, north americans do it all the time with cars - SUV's in particular. How many families own SUV's where not only does a minivan cost less, it would actually do the job better? The SUV's come with off-roading capabilities (well, they kinda used to anyways) that are typically never used, cost more, worse on fuel, but get the "status" that a minivan does not provide.Quote:
Originally Posted by MattiasNYC
The point is, nothing out there suits everyones needs. Not everyone chooses exactly what they need, nor do they do so objectively (Beats, anyone?).
Its also not like the D300's are a large chunk of the price of a M-P. Ram is worse, and its markup is ridiculous(nearly 2x market price).
Now, I still wouldn't buy it [even if I could afford it] b/c its apple, but i like how they built it. Small and powerful and quiet.
How often/quickly do the d700's drop from the 850mhz state? I recall a discussion in the original M-P thread involving some hefty reasoning over just how much if ever they would get to 850. I figured if they used the 7990 chips/bin they came from (it was discontinued) they would get a combined tdp near 375w, which would allow a decent use of near max boost.Quote:
Originally Posted by N19h7m4r3
Quote:
Originally Posted by N19h7m4r3
Thanks, I think this will get better for more apps, hopefully.
I think this is established response to R2D2's step-sister:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ytCEuuW2_A
The primary GPU is always at 850Mhz, it's the second one that down clocks when not used.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeroon
The configuration is GPU #1 is Video, #2 is rendering( openCL ) in general.
It's up to the application to effectively use both. For FCPX, and Luxmark they'll gladly run at 850Mhz until the job is completed, and then it'll down clock again. This is only the case in OSX.
In Windows both run at 850Mhz from what I've seen, hence the better performance, and scores. Especially for 3Dmark
On average the D700's are around 10-15% slower than a W9000 depending on application and use. Although many applications are still not using them or are using older versions of OpenGL/CL, which handicaps performance
http://www.legitreviews.com/images/r...04/luxmark.jpg
In Luxmark a 7970 in OSX will get you 1222 in Sala, while the D700 nets you 1755.
So it's a clock of 925Ghz Vs 850Mhz with the D700 getting out ahead.
http://forums.macrumors.com/attachme...2&d=1370989527
The Ars review by a professional user was very enlightening, and highlights the strengths and weakness very well.
Developers need to actively work too take advantage of both GPUs to their fullest, and AMD seriously need to work on their lacklustre OpenGL performance.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/01...-2013-mac-pro/
It's shameful that a GTX660 can match the D700 & 7970's in OpenGL performance simply down to shoddy drivers.
It's getting there. Even Aspyr the folks that ported Civilisation to the Mac have managed to let the second GPU be used for computation work. Netting better performance and quicker calculations, and nicer 4K support.Quote:
Originally Posted by sauria
Hmm, looks like to me that apple needs to work on the paddings and margins...
So does microsoft though.
I'e never heard that saying before. Could you explain what it means please?Quote:
Originally Posted by NEOAethyr
When you design an interface, you wanna draw your icons or text a few pixals away from the borders.Quote:
Originally Posted by N19h7m4r3
Some examples.
The Ok button on the gui in the screen above, needs the text to go down a few pixals to make it look right.
The worst offender, which I don't think is apple's fault though on this one, is the text that says mode : opencl blah blah blah... in blue.
It's right up against the borders.
The hardware devices section, the title needs to go down a bit...
Look at the opencl text right below it and you can see it needs to go down a bit too.
You learn this stuff writing css code in html.
You usually wanna setup a certain amount of spacing for left/right and top/bottom.
Anyways what I really meant by it is, I figure apple being what it is, would try to make there interface look as professional as possible.
But it looks like they pieced meal the code and just said screw it.
I've seen the title bar look and widget look before, but I never noticed how amateurish it all looked.
Titlebar it's self looks fine though.
I know they are using a form of unix, I can't remember the exact distro they baised it off (maybe it was mklinux).
It's essentially unix anyways, which has it's issues like this and so does windows.
Eh windows these days is actually about as bad, well almost.
It's just gets me thinking though, they're ripe for a 3rd party os to come out and beat them lol :D.
I don't mean anything bad by it, it just struck me.
I pick these things out.
Mmm actually now that I think about it, it's probably all down to that luxmark program, and not anything todo with apple.
Because you can draw buttons wrong like that in windows too.
My bad, I was thinking alot of that was down to apple and it's probably not.
Ah thanks, I never did much with HTML and CSS. Learn something new every day.
Also yes its down to Luxmark haha, it's a nasty looks interface and program.
Also the Kernel in OSX is/was the Mach-Kernal, which was made to be a BSD replacement. It's derivatives using XNU are the core behind Nextstep, openstep and OSX. Although it was reworked into what is now Darwin in OSX.
Right. That was my point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeroon
Ah NeXTSTEP is name I was grasping for, came across it looking up IRIX and stuff like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by N19h7m4r3
Thanks for bringing that up, I couldn't think of it for the life of me :).
apple makes pc's now?Quote:
Originally Posted by docwhom
They've made personal computers since the 70's.Quote:
Originally Posted by i found nemo
Apple likes to refer to their machines as Macs as opposed to (IBM) PCs. Although that's just marketing...
thought those were "power pc" type.Quote:
Originally Posted by N19h7m4r3
They started with Motarola CPU's, then PowerPC before going x86.Quote:
Originally Posted by i found nemo
Before the Macintosh they were just called Apple's. PC is just personal computer and Apple were the first to mass produce and establish them.
I can't speak for those Mac vs PC adds, I only ever saw them on youtube and they annoyed me. Since they're both personal computers with the differences at the time being OS, and PowerPC vs x86.
Since 2006 there's no difference at all bar OS, and then you can install any OS you like.